Comments on: Taxing Oil Companies to Fund Biofuel Investment

By: David Killion

David Killion — Fri, 09 May 2008 19:33:54 +0000

The hesitation for switching to renewable energy is not the result of the comapanies bringing oil to the market. As consumers we need to do a better job of purchasing and supporting alternative energy consuming devices, not gasoline consuming devices. If we keep buying Tahoes and H2s we’re never going to make headway. Can you blame the oil companies for supplying what the consumers are demanding. Can you imagine the impact of penalizing the oil companies? It would just result in less oil in the market and a rise in prices. Think, people, think … we can’t penalize the suppliers. We, as consumers, are the only ones that can make a difference. I imagine that when gas hits $10/gallon then more people might wake up. It’s simple economics, folks.
Hillary’s comment of, “I want to take the profits from the oil companies and build a strategic energy fund” only shows how much she doesn’t know about economics. Of course, it sounds really good to uneducated voters that she is pandering to though.

By: Paul Vaggen

Paul Vaggen — Fri, 09 May 2008 16:27:24 +0000

I can’t figure out why there is so much hesitation for switching to renewable energy. This is clearly a complicated issue with money, politics, and jobs all involved but people have to understand that our economy will be better off. There may be a hit at early adoption stages but thats what happens with any technological revolution. Oil company’s investing in renewable energy can make great positive effects, one example was a post I did a while ago:
http://www.ecologicliving.ca/2008/04/make-green-part-of-the-strategy/
The hesitation just drives me nuts!!!

By: Dave Shires

Dave Shires — Fri, 09 May 2008 12:00:07 +0000

Interesting idea, but I don’t think it’s a good idea. Here’s why:
Gas companies can simply pass the buck to consumers and almost certainly will. People get excited about taxing gas companies because they see them as greedy pigs with too much money and not urge to change. While the latter is definitely true, I really have no problem with them having too much money because it’s people who have given it to them. If you sell something that’s increasingly scarce and demand is still high, the price will go up and you’ll make tons of money.
The thing that’s going to change this is the price of gas. Keep it high and people start to demand other options (including better neighborhoods that are designed for walking and biking -never mind bio-fuels). Believe it or not, oil companies’ profit margins are not out of line with those of any other type of company.
Secondly, most bio-fuels are crap which take huge amounts of land, pesticides, and food crops, etc…
The subsidies that we are ALREADY paying (as pointed out by Pablo) should be eliminated. This will actually put more money into people’s pockets, but will also result in a higher price of gas.
Therefore – people will be able to better afford the higher prices at the pump, but they will have twice the incentive to stop using the stuff and change will evolve naturally.